Fast pullout from Iraq would be disaster

It's easy to get very, very angry at the Bush administration when you are visiting the Iraqi capital.

It's easy to get very, very angry at the Bush administration when you are visiting the Iraqi capital.

The violence causing Iraqis such hideous pain and claiming more U.S. troops can be traced directly to the mistakes made by U.S. officials before and after the invasion. You will hear this truth from U.S. military commanders and top Iraqi officials.

Many ordinary Iraqis find it hard to believe the Americans could have made such a mess unless they meant to destroy the country. But right-eous anger at the Bush team doesn't answer the urgent question: What do we do now?

Ten days in Baghdad have impressed on me one basic principle Congress must grasp: We can't afford a power vacuum.

It might be satisfying to say, "Let's get the hell out of Dodge." It might offer legislators political cover to call for timelines and funding cuts if Iraqi leaders don't meet U.S. benchmarks. It might make right-wing talk jocks feel righteous to tar war critics as traitors, while inanely calling for "victory" with no grasp of the disaster.

But none of these approaches helps Iraqis or us.

Iraq is on the verge of becoming a failed state, and we can't let that happen. We can't afford to leave as heedlessly as we came.

We foolishly disbanded, rather than revamped, the old Iraqi army; the new one we've created is penetrated by militias that contribute to sectarian violence.

We helped draft a constitution that created a weak prime minister; former U.S. ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad (now U.S. ambassador to the United Nations) backed the choice of the inadequate prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, rather than promote the candidacy of the far more competent Adel Abdul-Mahdi.

We also underestimated the impact of decades of oppression on Iraq's political climate. This legacy has fostered gross corruption, violence and sectarian political parties.

What, then, to do?

First, give the new U.S. military strategy a chance, as it aims to drive al-Qaida and hard-line Saddamists out of Baghdad and the suburbs around it. For the first time, the U.S. military is coordinating with Iraqi tribes, in recognition that it desperately needs the help of local fighters. The U.S. also should vet and upgrade Iraqi forces much faster than it is doing now.

This strategy might not work, but it deserves a few months beyond September, the date when Gen. David Petraeus, the top commander in Iraq, is supposed to report to Congress. Everyone knows that U.S. forces will be drawing down by 2008, both because of election-year politics and because the Army is overextended. Any drawdown will be far less risky if troops can curb al-Qaida.

Brig. Gen. Joe Anderson, chief of staff for the Multinational Corps in Iraq, said, "We owe ourselves one more drive, whether we punt, kick a field goal or score."

Second, be more realistic about setting benchmarks for Iraqi leaders. Right now, the system barely functions, so benchmarks have little real meaning. And political reconciliation can't occur between Shiites and Sunnis without competent leadership.

Some senior Iraqi officials are trying to make the system work better; we should give them more assistance. That may mean helping them change the prime minister.

"What we need most is not reconciliation," I was told with vehemence by one senior Iraqi official who didn't want his name used. "We need a government with leadership that can move ahead."

Third, be more realistic about the need to keep a troop presence in Iraq for the medium term, provided this is done in coordination with the Iraqi government. Bush's ill-conceived Iraq venture has fed a dangerous trend of disintegration in the region, from Gaza to Lebanon to Iraq, a trend that mainly benefits Sunni and Shiite Islamists.

A total pullout before Iraq's stability improves would feed this trend and embolden radical Islamists throughout the region. Most Iraqis believe it would spark an even more vicious civil war and a more drastic refugee outflow. Humanitarian-aid organizations fear a hasty U.S. exit will worsen the refugee crisis.

It's well and good to vent against Bush's Iraq errors, but we mustn't presume swift withdrawal will free us from the mess he made.

Trudy Rubin writes for The Philadelphia Inquirer.

trubin@phillynews.com

Never miss a story

Choose the plan that's right for you.
Digital access or digital and print delivery.